Ethical Issues in Empirical Studies of Software Engineering

Abstract

The popularity of empirical methods in software engineering research is on the rise. Surveys,
experiments, metrics, case studies, and field studies are examples of empirical methods used to
investigate both software engineering processes and products. The increased application of
empirical methods has also brought about an increase in discussions about adapting these
methods to the peculiarities of software engineering. In contrast, the ethical issues raised by
empirical methods have received little, if any, attention in the software engineering literature. This
article is intended to introduce the ethical issues raised by empirical research to the software
engineering research community, and to stimulate discussion of how best to deal with these ethical
issues. Through a review of the ethical codes of several fields that commonly employ humans and
artifacts as research subjects, we have identified major ethical issues relevant to empirical studies
of software engineering. These issues are illustrated with real empirical studies of software
engineering.

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.

7. Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT), “CAUT Responds to Tri-Council Code”, CAUT Bulletin, November 1997. See also http://www.caut.ca/english/bulletin/97_oct/tricouncil.htm

8. Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy of the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine, Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process, Volumes 1 & 2, Washington DC: National Academy Press, 1992, 1993.

9. Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy of the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine, On Being a Scientist, Second Edition, Washington DC: National Academy Press, 1995.

16. IEEE-CS/ACM Joint Task Force on Software Engineering Ethics and Professional Practices. Software Engineering Code of Ethics and Professional Practice, 1998. See also http://www.acm.org/serving/se/code.htm

21. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Research Involving Humans. Canberra: AusInfo, 1999. See also http://www.health.gov.au/nhmrc/publications/synopses/e35syn.htm

22. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Humans Subjects of Research, Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 1978. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Publication No. (OS) 78-0012. See also http://ohrp.osophs.dhhs.gov/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.htm

34. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), “Protection of Human Subjects,” Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, Part 46, 1990.

35. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, Office for Protection from Research Risks. Protecting Human Research Subjects: Institutional Review Board Guidebook. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1993. See also http://ohrp.osophs.dhhs.gov/irb/irb_guidebook.htm